Practice Connecting RDA and RDF Linked Data for a Wide World of Connected Possibilities Ashleigh Faith & Michelle Chrzanowski Ashleigh N. Faith, MLIS is an Adjunct Instructor at the University of Pittsburgh Information School, [email protected] Michelle Chrzanowski, MLS is a Reference Librarian at the Tidewater Community College Norfolk Campus Library, [email protected] Libraries have struggled with connecting a plethora of content and the metadata stored in catalogs to patrons. Adding more value to catalogs, more tools for reference librarians, and enriched patron search, linked data is a means to connect more people with more relevant information. With the recent transition to the Resource Description and Access (RDA) cataloging standard within libraries, linking data in library databases has become a much easier project to tackle, largely because of another standard called Resource Description Framework (RDF). Both focus on resource description and both are components of linked data within the library. Tying them together is the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) conceptual framework. Acknowledging that linked data components are most likely new to many librarians, this article seeks to explain what linked data is, how RDA and RDF are connected by FRBR, and how knowledge maps may improve information access. Introduction Interest in linked data has been growing. Recently, a search of the abstract databases Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar show “linked data” as a search term an average of 45,633 times from 2010 to July 2015. From January to July 2015 alone, "linked data" was searched an average of 3,573 times. It is therefore no wonder that more people are paying attention to data and how it can be linked to other data. Libraries in particular have started investing resources in linked data. From widely used sources like the Library of Congress Subject Headings and Authorities to more specialized resources like the Getty Vocabularies, linked data has become a popular, if little understood, tool within the library. The basic concept of linked data is at the core of the Semantic Web. Both are synonymous with making things easier to find through multiple access points for a diverse user base. Although it is in the interest of the technical services, metadata, or cataloging librarians to know, linked data can also significantly Vol. 3, No. 2 (Fall 2015) DOI 10.5195/palrap.2015.106 122 New articles in this journal are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 United States License. This journal is published by the University Library System of the University of Pittsburgh as part of its D-Scribe Digital Publishing Program and is cosponsored by the University of Pittsburgh Press. Pennsylvania Libraries: Research & Practice palrap.org Connecting RDA and RDF help all other librarians- in public, academic, and special libraries -connect more people to more relevant information more efficiently and effectively than current methods. Linked data also has the potential to empower patrons in complex search. This article primarily focuses on linked bibliographic data, but there are other types such as vocabulary and authority linked data as well. Libraries have struggled with connecting a plethora of content, and the metadata stored in the catalog, for their patrons’ use. With the recent transition to the Resource Description and Access (RDA) cataloging standard within libraries, linking data in library databases has become a much easier project to tackle, largely because of another standard called Resource Description Framework (RDF). Tying them together is the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) conceptual framework. Acknowledging that these terms are most likely new to many librarians, this article seeks to highlight recent literature and resources, define and explore RDA, RDF, and FRBR in more detail, expand on how these three topics interconnect, provide a sample teaching aid for library linked data, and bring forth a few examples of linked library data in practice. The purpose throughout is to explore how librarians can harness RDA, RDF, and FRBR for improved information access with linked data. Literature Review With recent attention to RDA and RDF respectively, a strong collection of research has emerged. In RDA, librarians are at the forefront with the RDA Toolkit and numerous sites, blogs, videos, and monographs on transitioning to and understanding RDA. A few open access resources include the Association for Library Collections & Technical Services (ALCTS) webinar series (2012), the Tennessee Libraries Association RDA guide (Baskett, Underdown-DuBois, & Busch, 2013), Mark K. Ehlert’s RDA brief (2013); and the University of North Florida’s RDA training booklet (Veve, 2014). The RDA Toolkit, as well as resources like Mering’s (2014) student-focused RDA Workbook and Maxwell’s (2013) detailed examples of RDA cataloging, are also great resources but are not open access. A few notable articles on RDA, RDF, and linked data in libraries include Alemu, Stevens, Ross, and Chandler (2012), which supports the use of RDF within the library; Baker, Coyle, and Petiya (2014), which compare FRBR, RDA, and BIBFRAME; Coyle (2010), which expressly maps RDA to RDF fields in a library case study; Panchyshyn and Park (2015), which describe how RDA will enable hybridized cataloging; Tillett (2013), which covers RDA and the linked data environment in libraries; Wacker, Han, and Dartt (2011), which test how RDA can be used in Metadata Object Description Standards (MODS), Encoded Archival Description (EAD), and Dublin Core (DC). Most of these studies include a brief overview of RDA, linked data, or RDF and all describe, at least in brief, why linked data is so important for supporting strong information retrieval and connecting information within libraries. When reading literature on RDA, linked data, or RDF, a suggested relevancy cutoff date would be no earlier than late 2012 into early 2013. The reason for this cutoff is that RDA and RDF continue to change and reading anything older than 2012 could potentially be outdated. That said, there are a number of blogs one should monitor in order to stay abreast of RDA, like Haider’s RDA blog (2015) and the RDA Toolkit blog (2010), and resources for RDF, like the W3C’s RDF primer page (W3C, 2014). A few example resources for FRBR are its use with the various editions and adaptations of Bram Stoker’s Dracula (City of Mountain View Library, 2010) and Riley’s work on interoperable (linking) FRBR-based data (2010). The Linked Library Data Interest Group (2015) (LITA/ALCTS) is also a solid resource to watch. Books such as Coyle’s (2012) Linked Data Tools: Connecting on the Web as well as Linked Data for Libraries, Archives and Museums: How to Clean, Link and Publish Your Metadata (van Hooland and Verborgh, 2014) are also helpful for exploring the opportunities of linked data in the library as well as outlining a few linked data techniques and tools. Vol. 3, No. 2 (Fall 2015) DOI 10.5195/palrap.2015.106 123 Pennsylvania Libraries: Research & Practice palrap.org Connecting RDA and RDF There are also a number of general linked data and linked open data (LOD) blogs available to stay abreast of what is going on, such as Linked Open Data in Libraries Archives and Museums (LODLAM) (LODLAM, 2015); the LOD2 project blog which seeks to create knowledge out of interlinked data (LOD2, 2015); the W3C blogs for information such as the “Building the Web of Things” blog entry (W3C, 2015); the Association of College and Research Libraries’ (ACRL) TechConnect blog (2015) which focuses on linked data within the library sphere and Chris Bourg (2015), Director of Libraries at MIT, has a fun and interesting blog that sometimes delves into linked library data called the Feral Librarian. These blogs often are also associated with groups working on linked data. A few other groups working with linked data are the W3C Library Linked Data Incubator Group (2012), the LITA Linked Library Data Interest Group (2015), and the Digital Library Federation Linked Open Data interest group (2015). Brief Review on Access Points and Metadata Access points are points of information that a patron will use to try and find or access information and materials. Unfortunately access points like subject headings and authority names are generally inconsistent and unreliable. Creating consistent access points- like subject headings, data in MAchine-Readable Cataloging (MARC) fields, and markup standards –is a component of bibliographic control. Bibliographic control is achieved through standards like the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR2) and RDA. Standard and consistent information is a key component to linking data. Access points are pieces of information coded into a machine readable format. In libraries, access points are most often recorded in MARC records. MARC data fields are mentioned in Mering (2014) as containers. Metadata are the data field tags for information- essentially the fields that identify what the information to be entered is supposed to mean. For instance, the information 97831614100 could be an International Standard Book Number (ISBN), a local control code for internal library use, an acquisition number, or any number of other types of information. As soon as the information 97831614100 is entered into an ISBN field, it is immediately recognized, or tagged, as an ISBN in the library database Figure 1 From Top Left to Right- OCLC MARC Record, Twitter, and Facebook Examples Vol. 3, No. 2 (Fall 2015) DOI 10.5195/palrap.2015.106 124 Pennsylvania Libraries: Research & Practice palrap.org Connecting RDA and RDF as well as any other database (because an ISBN is a common type of data) that uses an ISBN tag. In linked data these tags are called data elements. ISBN information can be captured with the MARC tag 020 using the RDA standard for describing bibliographic information. In addition to MARC fields, metadata access points can be seen in Twitter, Facebook, and numerous other places (Figure 1).